Libel Reform Campaign: Proposals do not go far enough

A campaign group has said the current proposals for libel reform "do not yet address the extensive problems of libel bullying and the chill on public debate".

The Libel Reform Campaign has responded to a statement published by the Ministry of Justice assessing a report by the joint scrutiny committee on the draft defamation bill, which was published by the government in March 2011.

The government has said it will make changes to introduce a single publication rule to reduce libel tourism.

The Libel Reform Campaign is calling for "true reform" and for libel law to be brought "up to date for the internet age".

The group wants better protection for bloggers and authors writing in the public interest. It also wants the bill to tackle the problem of companies using the laws to silence criticism.

The campaigners have said in a statement that "the government's initial response falls short of what is needed in some important areas":

"We need a new effective statutory public interest defence. Instead, the government is only proposing minor changes to an already complex, unwieldy and expensive defence, called 'Reynolds Privilege'."

It adds: "Libel laws are used by corporations and associations to squash any criticism and manage their brand." The group states that "laws need rebalancing to protect the ordinary individual or responsible publisher, by restricting the ability of such 'non-natural persons' to sue for libel or threaten to do so".

Campaigners also say "the law allows trivial and vexatious claims", stating that "it should be easier 'strike out' of trivial or inappropriate claims at an early stage".

Recommendations by the Ministry of Justice in response to the October report include that the government should have "particular regard to the importance of freedom of expression when bringing forward this bill and developing proposals in its broader consideration of the law relating to privacy".

The report also urges the government to monitor whether the bill achieves its goal and make clear, "in a way that the courts can take into account, during the passage of the bill if not before, when it is seeking to make changes of substance to the law and when it is simply codifying the existing common law".

Free daily newsletter

If you like our news and feature articles, you can sign up to receive our free daily (Mon-Fri) email newsletter (mobile friendly).